Nationalist Internet Incest

One of the fallacies of the internet is that social media is able to beat main stream media at its own game. The Western Mail, the Daily Post, the Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror etc can publish shit, but we have this free on-line  media that can counteract their lies, but this is a very partial truth.

The fact is that Social Media gives us a rose tinted glass that we see our own world through. I follow people I agree with on Twitter I friend people I agree with on Facebook. I block and unfriend people, and create my own little bubble of social media followers who agree 100% with me!

The racists have also created their own little internet spaces that convince them that they are the voice of the people.

My social media profile tells me that there are lots and lots of people that agree with me that the best answer to Brexit is Welsh Independence, they are correct. But to make that point on Social media we have to un block and re friend our opponents in order to persuade them to support our cause, because nationalist internet incest isn't going to move the cause forward at all!

We have to confront the trolls, not ignore them, we have to make the case for independence to those who currently oppose it, not just revel in those who support it! 

Wales in Europe

A message from Plaid Cymru supporting a vote for the UK to remain in the European Union

Wales benefits from being part of the EU, economically, socially and culturally.

The EU helped to establish peace and keeps the peace in Europe: a role that should never be underestimated and which we value.

Nearly 200,000 jobs in Wales are linked to our access to the Single Market and its half a billion people. Thousands of students and young people benefit from EU programmes enabling them to
study and work in other countries and learn new languages.

These are just some of the advantages to Wales.
And thanks to the EU we have laws on equality, on the environment, on workers' and consumers' rights, on farming and food quality, to tackle climate change and much more.

The United Kingdom already opts out of the Schengen travel area, which is why we still have passport control at the UK's external borders. And of course we never joined the single currency.

There is a lot we would like to change about the EU, but we can only do that from within. There's no point shouting from the sidelines. We choose instead to work with our sister parties in the
European Free Alliance and progressive colleagues across the EU. That is how we will get a more open, democratic and effective Europe within which Wales will play its full part.

Scotland's referendum a winner - whatever the result

Over the years I have spent many long and tedious hours sitting in the foyer of village halls acting as a polling agent. Some of my best friends are people I met representing opposing parties who I have spent those hours with chatting about what's on TV, books, life in general; even playing cards with to pass the hours as we wait and wait for a voter, any voter, of any hue, to turn up so we can cross them off the list. I've been in a hustings meeting before an election where there were more candidates on the stage than voters in the audience. Seeing pictures of people queuing up to register to vote; seeing pictures of meetings with standing room only, brings a tear to my eye and makes me feel jealous of Scotland.

As a Welsh nationalist I am obviously an avid supporter of the Yes side, but even if every one of the newly registered missing million votes No and every one of those who have had to stand in the back of the crowded meeting room votes No – this referendum will still be a resounding success because of the way in which it has succeeded to re-engage people with the democratic process. For that, alone, Mr Salmond should be heartily congratulated - whatever the outcome on September 18th.

the queue to register to vote is currently running out the door #Glasgow #indyref pic.twitter.com/XM0Hr3e7Us

— Stuart Crawford (@potatojunkie) September 2, 2014

The Scotsman a TROLL only site!

Cyber bullying is part of the unfortunate nature of the internet. Where there is disagreement on matters sporting, religious, artistic, scientific and, yes, even political here be Trolls. It is not a phenomenon unique to the Scottish independence referendum debate but it does exist on both Yes and No sides of the indyref debate on the internet, just because some of the debate is "on the internet"; for either side to deny that unworthy comments have been made by supporters of both Yes and No is sticking ones head in the sand.

I am an unequivocal supporter of the Yes campaign, but some comments that I have read on Twitter, Facebook and newspaper response sites from YES supporters have turned my stomach, they shouldn’t have been made and should have been condemned by fellow yesers.

Likewise decent supporters of the No side should condemn the vile vitriol that is spewed by too many No supporters on line. If there is one thing that should unite those who are passionate about either side of the argument it should be that the debate should be a good clean fight.

However there is one thing that worries me about the ability to have a good clean fight and that is that a number of us, from both sides of the debate, who use to have respectable discussions on the Scotsman site now get our comments rejected with This comment was left by a user who has been blocked by our staff.

The Scotsman is actively blocking those of us who wish to debate the issues with mutual respect and only allows abusive trolls (from both sides) to comment, whilst publishing leaders condemning abusive comments as a “Cybernat” problem!

Not In or Out, but a New Europe

The European debate in the UK is rather odd. It is portrayed as one of two stark choices IN or OUT. If an in/out referendum were to be held tomorrow I would suspect, based on what my friends and family say, that most of the voters of Wales would vote OUT (not a scientific survey, but this is a blog not an academic essay).

The oddity is that most people who tell me that they would vote OUT are not anti-European; they are opposed to a European Superstate. They agree with the idea of a Common Market, they agree with the idea of a "level playing field" where employment rights or animal welfare standards etc are equal thoroughout Europe they like the idea of free trade and free travel in Europe; what they don't want is an United States of Europe.

Such attitudes are not "little Englander" attitudes, they are not UKIP attitudes; they are actually Pan European attitudes. Large numbers of the citizens of every part of Europe want to rein back the idea of a European Superstate and re-embrace the idea of a Common Market. Supporting either the Europhobes or the Europhiles in an UK stark choice referendum will be bad for Wales. What we should do is unite with those, thoroughout Europe, who want a new European settlement where independent nations are In Europe, but not under Europe's thumb!

Oh No! Not another Bloody Referendum

We pay our politicians good money to represent us, for that money they should bloody well do the job, rather than jib out of the job every so often and ask for a "referendum" to cover their fears of making a decision.

There is something patently ridiculous in the idea of needing a referendum to make a decision - when the referendum can only be called when those who have the power to make the decision, without a referendum, feel that the vote will go their way.

If the last need for a devolution referendum is anything to go by, we won't even have a debate about the issue of tax varying powers for the next goodness knows how many years, we will just have a convoluted debate about the best time to decide about discussing the issue!

Pathetic!

There are only two honest ways of dealing with this issue, one is for the elected to accept / reject Silk's recommendations without a referendum and accept the consequences of their decision. The other is to put the matter to a referendum as soon as is practically possible – next May - perhaps. Procrastinating about the best time will be dishonest, duplicitous and a disservice to Wales

If we have to have another bloody referendum I will, of course, make another application to lead the No campaign on a NO! Not Good Enough platform :-)

What is the Labour and Tory Vision for an Independent Scotland?

In trying to follow the Scottish Independence referendum debate, there is one strain of argument that confuses me. It is the argument where Unionists (usually) ask questions about the policies that an Independent Scottish Government would follow, which are sometimes answered, quite authoritively, by Nationalists.

Questions like:

What sort of currency would an independent Scotland have?

What would Scotland's defence policies be? If England went to War would Scotland Support England? How many Aeroplanes would the Scots Air Force have?

How would Scotland deal with welfare and benefits? Would taxes be higher, lower, or similar?

What sort of economic policies would an Independent Scotland follow? What would Scotland's international relations be like?

They are all fair questions, I suppose. They may be questions that an "undecided" might want an answer to. They might be questions that a truly independent commentator (if such a creature exists) might be able to guess at by looking at the historic polity of Scotland.

But are they questions for the YES side alone?

I think not.

If Scotland votes Yes the answers to these questions will not just be in the hands of the Yes voters. Those who vote No and those who don't vote will also live in an independent Scotland and their opinions will still count in an independent Scotland.

The idea that the SNP should be forced to answer these policy questions whilst the unionists snigger is bad for the possible future of Scottish politics.

If Scotland votes Yes the first elected independent parliament may not be formed by the SNP. Voters may think that, having achieved its goal, the SNP is defunct. There may be a Labour Government, possibly even a Conservative Government in the newly Independent Holyrood Parliament.

In order to get the fullest possible picture of what an independent Scotland might look like those who oppose Scottish Independence should surely tell us how they would run an independent Scotland should the referendum vote go against them!

Breakfast Time in The Bay

The Electoral Commission will be launching its statutory report on the referendum on the law-making powers of the National Assembly for Wales at 8:00am on Wednesday 13 July 2011 in Conference Room 24 in Tŷ Hywel, the National Assembly for Wales.

The event, which is sponsored by the Deputy Presiding Officer, David Melding AM, will be an opportunity for the Chief Counting Officer, Jenny Watson, to outline the Commission’s main findings about what they learnt in the process of running the referendum.

Breakfast will be provided!

As one of those registered to campaign in the referendum I have been invited to the do! Great! Thanks for the invitation!

I would love to meet the Electoral Commissioners to discuss how successful (or not) the Commission was in running the referendum. It is clear from my blogs and my campaign during the referendum that I was unhappy with the way that the referendum was run, so an opportunity to voice those concerns with the Commissioners would be very welcome.

However the practical problems of getting to Cardiff from Llandudno for a breakfast meeting at eight o'clock in the morning, with all respect, is so absurd as to make such a meeting part of the problem.

Discussing the way in which the referendum was run over bacon eggs and lava bread first thing in the morning at a venue that it is impossible for all but the few "within the bubble" to attend shows just how out of touch with needs of ordinary campaigners for Welsh Democracy the Electoral Commission is!

The time and place is worse than just Cardiff Centric, having looked at the timetables, even if I decided to go down to Cardiff the day before and spend the night with my sister in St Mellons, a few miles away from the Bay, it would still be difficult for me to get to Tŷ Hywel for 8am by public transport.

If the Electoral Commission is really interested in engaging with all stakeholders in the referendum process I call on it to cancel this totally ridiculous breakfast meeting and to arrange a meeting at a sensible time in a sensible place that would give access to the many rather than the select few!

Gracious in defeat

As the only person to apply for lead campaign status for the NO campaign, I am disgusted that Rachel Banner was invited to give a post result speech in the Senedd but that I wasn't even invited to the count.

Had I had the invite this is what I would have said in my "response to the result speech":

I give the Yes campaign hearty congratulations on a tremendous victory. I was, honestly shocked by the fact that the Yes victory was so decisive; I didn't expect the result to be so clear cut. The results in Flintshire, in Denbighshire, in Powys and even in Monmouthshire (where 321 voters who forgot to vote yes are kicking themselves today) bowled me over. It was beyond my wildest expectations.

I should also like to thank the quarter of a million people who voted in support of my No! It's not good enough! campaign. I knew that many thought that the referendum question was the wrong one; that it didn't offer equality with the Scottish Parliament or the Northern Ireland Assembly; but I hadn't expected as many as a quarter of a million people to agree with me in the ballot box.

I empathise with the 65% of the electorate who chose not to vote because what was being offered was so insignificant that it wasn't worth voting for. I give them my 100% assurance that the campaign starts now to ensure that the next referendum (in 2012, if not sooner) will offer them an option that is well worth going out to vote Yes for!

Wales says Yes

With four results still to declare Wales has said Yes, the result in the Rhondda having just taken the Yes vote over the 402,594 threshold needed to win.

A Poll and a Pinch of Salt

The results of the recent ITV YouGov poll were published on S4C's Y Byd ar Bedwar tonight. The opinion poll suggests that 67% of us will vote yes and 33% will vote no; this seems over optimistic to me; I would have expected the vote to be much, much closer.

Even odder is the poll's suggestion that turn out will be a whopping 56%!

I tend to agree with Jac of the North's assessment of the campaign so far:

"Rugby players say Yes', Business says Yes', 'Man at bus stop says "what referendum?"'

I haven't seen any enthusiasm for either side's argument, the vast majority of my friends and acquaintances either don't know or don't care about the issue.

OK YouGov have done a scientific poll, I have just heard what the people in the shop and the pub have said, but my expectation is that turnout will be about 30% and that the split will be about 51% 49%, but I wouldn't want to commit to which side will win which percentage.

I hope that YouGov is right and that I'm wrong but if I was in charge of either side I would neither rest on my laurels or throw in the towel based on what appears to me to be a rather iffy poll finding.

Vote Yes because the Assembly listens !

There was an exceptionally important debate in the National Assembly Chamber yesterday; despite its importance it probably won't receive much media attention.

It was a debate about work based training for vulnerable children. This might not be a subject that raises the blood pressure of political activists in Wales; indeed it was so uncontroversial that it was given unanimous support by Assembly Members.

The result of the debate will mean that the Government will change some of its policies regarding work based training for the most vulnerable children in Wales, but the importance of the debate is much more than the beneficial effect that it will have on the lives of vulnerable children; its importance lies in how vulnerable children, themselves, have actually caused a changed of Assembly Government policy.

The change in government policy began with two vulnerable children voicing their frustration to the child protection charity Action for Children - Gweithredu dros Blant. Gweithredu dros Blant took up the children's issues and presented them in a petition to the Assembly. The Assembly's cross party Petitions Committee looked at the petition, took evidence from interested parties and presented that evidence to ministers; and the ministers have acted on that evidence.

This is fantastic, this is real democracy in action, and this is an example of real people changing policy in areas that affect their lives.

Historic is an overused word in politics but an occasion where vulnerable children's complaints can lead to a change in government policy is really historic!

Petitions being ignored have played a big part in the Westminster government's history. I have signed some of the Petitions to the Prime Minister on http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/ and all of them have resulted in an e-mail that says in civil service speak "p*** off"!

Petitions to the Welsh Assembly, even from vulnerable children, can change government policy!

The Government in Wales reacts to the opinions of the people of Wales in a way that Westminster doesn't!

Is there a better reason for voting YES on March 3rd?

Yes! For Rugby

Despite the best efforts of Yes for Wales and Untrue Lies there doesn't seem much enthusiasm about debating the pros and cons of moving to part four of the Government of Wales Act (2006).

There is however one question that can always guarantee to raise Welsh passions and to divide our nation into two separate camps: What is the National Game of Wales – Rugby or Football?

By being led by the Chief Executive of the WRU and by its excessive use of rugby images is Yes for Wales in danger of scoring an own goal by alienating those who would vote Football in a vote that really mattered?

The truth about my Jim Trott type No Campaign

I have enjoyed my No campaign.

It has, I hope, highlighted some of the faults in the Political Parties Elections and Referendums Act (2000). It has noted that the reasons for voting one way or the other and even not voting cannot be extrapolated in an over simplistic way. The reason why people vote Yes, No or choose not to vote in a referendum are many and variable.

But when devo naysayers complain in perpetuity that the March 3rd referendum result was won unfairly, they can be reminded that:

History records that the only official bid to form a No campaign came from a nationalist supporter of independence. The establishment refused that bid and a majority of the people of Wales abstained, in disgust, at the establishment's attempt to stifle their voice or voted NO! NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

It may not be true, but it is as good a narrative as the naysayers lie that those who didn't vote in 1997 effectively voted no!

My wife and I failed to vote in 1997, because my mother in law was taken into hospital on referendum day and we didn't leave the hospital until after the polling station closed. One of the reasons for my No campaign is that I have been continuously peeved at claims that that our failure to vote is assumed to be a tacit expression of our opposition to Welsh self determination - nothing could be further from the truth!

With voting day only a month away I will come clean and declare that my vote will be a Jim Trott type No – No – No – No - No - No - Yes!

Getting Up Betsan's Nose

When the Electoral Commission decided last Wednesday that there should be no officially designated Yes and No campaigns, Yes For Wales Ltd, the only bidder for the Yes lead designation, put out a statement saying that despite the Commission's decision that the company would remain the official leader of the Yes campaign because it retained the support of all the other groups who had registered support for a Yes vote. Fair enough.

Yes for Wales Ltd also noted the fact that there isn't a similar umbrella group that unites those on the No side, again a fair comment.

Given that Yes campaigners have united around Yes For Wales Ltd and that No campaigners are disparate the Company's statement also contained an opinion that broadcasters should reflect this reality saying that as there is no recognised lead for the 'No' campaign, no single group should be treated with any sort of priority over other fringe parties campaigning for a No vote. In other words Mark Beech from the Monster Raving Loonies and myself should be treated as the True Wales no campaigns' equals.

This statement appears to have got up the nose of BBC Wales' political editor Betsan Powys. How dare Yes for Wales interfere with the BBC's editorial judgement! On Dragon's Eye on Thursday on her blog today she says "We'll decide who to interview based - not on whether they've sent an envelope to the Electoral Commission - but after considering things like whether a group, or individual, has a demonstrable track record of campaigning on the issue, have campaigning capacity and whether they represent that side of the debate to the greatest extent. In other words you try to use editorial judgement when you decide who to interview and how often."


I totally agree with Betsan the BBC and other broadcasters must show fair editorial judgement in deciding who to interview and how often, to do otherwise would be unacceptable especially from a public service broadcaster. But I'm not quite sure that the BBC is showing fair editorial judgement. When Betsan goes on to describe who the BBC is likely to interview from the No side she explains that we will be "hearing from all sorts of voices from within True Wales".


Mark Beech and I might just have "sent an envelope" to the Electoral Commission in Ms Powys' haughty view, but in sending those envelopes we have shown that concerns about the GOW Act referendum are wider than just those expresses by voices within True Wales. As Yes For Wales Ltd says any fair editorial judgement should ensure that those wider concerns are heard.

No 'lead campaigners' for National Assembly referendum

Press Release from Electoral Commission 25 Jan 2011

The Electoral Commission has decided that, although the applicant to become the lead campaigner for the ‘Yes’ campaign in the referendum adequately represented those campaigning for that outcome, the only applicant to be the lead campaigner for the ‘No’ campaign does not meet this statutory test. In these circumstances, the law does not allow the Commission to designate lead organisations for the referendum on the law making powers of the National Assembly for Wales.

The Commission is now seeking the views of all registered campaigners on how it might help voters get information about the arguments for and against the referendum question, in addition to its planned public awareness campaign.

Kay Jenkins, Head of the Electoral Commission in Wales, said: “The only applicant for the ‘No’ campaign in Wales didn’t meet the statutory test so the Commission cannot appoint lead campaigners for this referendum.”

“Voters need to have as much information as possible about the referendum question, and we are already planning to send an information booklet to every household in Wales explaining what it is about, as well as how to take part on 3 March. Voters should look out for this next week and there will be advertising across television, radio, in Welsh newspapers and on the internet.”

“A number of campaigners – including political parties, individuals and trade unions - have also already started their campaigns. So there should be plenty of opportunities for voters to hear the arguments of both sides in the media, in campaign materials and online.”

“We are also now seeking the views of registered campaigners on what more the Commission might do to help voters get information about the arguments they are making. We will announce the results of those discussions as soon as possible.”

Decision on designating lead campaigners

The Political Parties, Elections & Referendums Act (PPERA) 2000 requires the Commission to determine whether each applicant to become a lead campaigner ‘adequately represents’ those campaigning for the relevant referendum outcome. The Commission must designate lead campaigners for both sides of the debate, or not at all.

Anyone wishing to spend more than £10,000 in the referendum must register as a ‘registered campaigner’. Any registered campaigner could apply to become a lead campaigner, giving them access to higher spending limits, a public grant, referendum broadcasts on television and radio and free delivery of campaign material to voters.

Two campaigners submitted applications to the Commission to become ‘lead campaigners’ for the referendum. The Commission decided that while ‘Yes for Wales’ adequately represented those campaigning for the ‘Yes’ campaign, David Alwyn ap Huw Humphreys did not meet the statutory test of adequately representing those campaigning for the ‘No’ campaign. This means that the Commission cannot appoint lead campaigners for either side of the debate.

Provision of information to voters

The Commission is already planning an extensive public information campaign, including sending an information booklet to every household in Wales. The booklets are being sent to voters next week and are currently available on the Commission’s website.

The Government of Wales Act 2006 states that in the event that there are no lead campaigners for the referendum, the Commission has the discretion to “take such steps as they think appropriate to provide information…about the arguments for each answer to the referendum question.”

The Commission considered whether or not it would be possible to include additional information about the arguments for each answer to the question in the booklet it is sending out next week, or in a separate information leaflet. The Commission decided that this was not possible within the timescales available.

The Commission has decided to seek the views of all registered campaigners this week on the following options:

Establishing a page on the Commission’s website – which voters will already be directed in the Commission’s information booklet and advertising campaign – that would provide voters with links to the websites of all registered campaigners. This is the Commission’s preferred option.
Offering all registered campaigners in addition the opportunity to each place a short statement of their arguments on the Commission’s website. The Commission has said it will need to consider further whether or not this option will work in practice, taking account of the response of the registered campaigners.
Once it has heard from registered campaigners, the Commission will make an announcement as soon as possible on whether it will undertake either or both of these activities.

The Commission will start sending out its information booklet to voters from 31 January. A copy of the booklet is available on the Commission’s website.

Has the Whisky in the Jar undermined Welsh Democracy?

True Wales' decision not to apply for official designation was not a surprise to me, it was widely mooted a fortnight or so before the closing date for applications to lead the campaigns.

I made my semi-jocular application to lead the No campaign because I knew, beforehand, that True Wales was seriously considering not making a bid.

Supporters of the Yes Campaign have been unjustly condemnatory of True Wales for not registering as an official No campaign.

I can appreciate the Yes frustration, but True Wales have not broken any rules or laws by not registering, so if democracy has been in anyway ill served by True Wales' decision not to register, the fault lies with the rules and laws, rather than a group which abided by those rules and laws!

Indeed if there is no official Yes campaign it won't actually be True Wales' fault, it will be mine, for not submitting a good enough bid to succeed as No lead.

So the Yes campaign may, actually, have been hindered by the fact that the only No bidder had miscounted his fingers when measuring the Whisky in the jar before submitting the bid! ---- (This is a Theory not an Admission; Possibly!)

Nevertheless an interesting way of judging a democratic process, one must admit!

A Yes bid was made and a No bid was made – how can it be right or democratic for a valid Yes bid to be rejected just because the No bid was not quite up to scratch? What is democratic about one campaign being dependant on the ability, efficiency and sobriety of its opponent's campaign?

Silly PPER!

This is not a term that will be oft found on this blog but In Fairness to True Wales, despite the rhetoric, it is not True Wales' policies or difficulties that have thrown a spanner into the workings of the Government of Wales Act referendum campaign it is the inadequacies of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (the PPER Act), an Act drafted without the foresight to know that this sort of pickle would almost inevitably arise.

I was speaking to an English friend a couple of weeks ago who is an avid supporter of electoral reform, he was excited by the prospect of the AV referendum, not just because of the issue but because it will be the first time he will be allowed to campaign and vote in a referendum. To me, an old stager of referendum campaigns, that statement came as a bit of a shock, especially as he is a few years older than me. Since I was born there have been 9 Welsh referenda, 5 of which I voted in, and 2 in which I campaigned before voting age. I have also voted in two parish pump referenda.

My English friend is correct, English voters who are under 54 years of age have never had a chance to vote in a referendum, and that is the main difficulty that the PPER Act has. It was drafted by and voted through Westminster by people with little or no practical experience of referenda.

One of the clauses of the Act states that in order to be designated an official campaign the applicant must show that the applicant adequately represents those campaigning for the outcome at the referendum in relation to which the applicant seeks to be designated. Anybody with experience of referenda knows that this is a clause that it would be virtually impossible to comply with, on either side.

I always voted Yes (Dry) in the Sunday Closing Act referenda. I voted Dry, the first time, because I worked in a pub at the time and I didn't want to work on Sundays.

Many Nationalists voted Dry because the Closing Act was the only visibly distinct Welsh Act at the time that made Wales different.

Members of Licensed Clubs and owners of Licensed Restaurants, unaffected by the Act, knew that they had huge profits from being open when the pubs were closed.

Licensees in just over the county border pubs use to give avid support to keep their own counties wet, whilst campaigning just as avidly to keep the neighboring county dry.

The teetotal chapel vote went dry in the hope that one day closing would be the start of a slippery slope towards seven days dry.

The idea that such varied opinions could coalesce into a single campaign that would adequately represents those campaigning for the outcome is patently ridiculous!

During the 1997 Devolution campaigns George Robertson MP declared his support for Scottish Devolution because It will kill Nationalism stone dead. I am sure that Lord Robertson genuinely believed that, he might even be correct - if it wasn't for devolution would Scotland be more or less likely to be independent now? Whatever the answer to that question, I know for a fact that Alex Salmond wasn't campaigning for a Yes vote in order to kill nationalism stone dead! Salmond hoped that he was on the No side's slippery slope!

Incompatible views that can't be included in the PPER "outcome" clause!

Daft Act, badly drafted, but in the context of my No Not Good Enough Campaign – if the National Assembly had the powers to control its own Elections and Referenda (it doesn't), today's confusion, which is probably a balls ups caused by a lack of experience of referenda in England , would have been avoided by the more Referendum Savvy Assembly!

If it does nothing else, I hope that my eccentric, hopeless, bloody pathetic, not credible, nutcase, brilliant idea etc campaign, has at least highlighted some of the weaknesses of the Act!

Opposing The Elite in Welsh Politics

One of the things that really annoys me about the True Wales No campaign is their claim that those who are elected to serve the people of Wales by the people of Wales are some sort of élite.

I am a fairly common bloke, I was bought up on a Council House Estate, I still live in a Housing Association owned home. The highest "status" that I have ever achieved is a Charge Nurse in the healthcare sector. My father was a railway signalman pre Beeching and then became a building site Labourer and eventually a local authority grounds man. Not a very elite life, but yet I can guarantee that if I were to meet them on the street I could greet about a third of AMs on first name terms and they would greet me back by name.

I can greet them by name because our paths have crossed in such mundane environments as car boot sales, marts, chapels, non league footy games and supermarkets, rather than in some corridors of power.

I can't think of any AM who has had an elite education in one of the top public schools or is a former member of anything like the Bullingdon Club.

I believe that one AM has had an Oxbridge education and that there are two are millionaires in the Senedd, but even they are from mining stock!

Look at the party leaders.

In Wales:
Carwyn Jones – Working Class Parents, Comprehensive education, & Aber Uni, Jobbing Barister

Ieuan Wyn Jones – Father a Minister, grandfather a miner, Comprehensive education and Liverpool Polytech; country solicitor

Nick Bourn – State Grammar School – Aber and Cambridge Universities (a bit posh). Working life a collage teacher (not so posh). Family background never mentioned, (which suggests common as muck in Tory circles), but I understand that Nick is also from a mining background.

Kirsty Williams also with working class parents and a comprehensive education; a degree in American Studies – how élite - from Manchester University!

On the UK level:
David Cameron Public School, Oxbridge Multi Millionaire, privileged upbringing

Nick Clegg, Public school, Oxbridge, Multi Millionaire, privileged upbringing.

Ed Milliband, very rich son of an intellectual, state and Oxbridge educated, a member of a politically elite family, has only worked within professional politics.

Now, if True Wales is really opposed to power being given to the Elite shouldn't they be begging for lots more power to be moved from the posh, rich and truly elite sorts in Westminster down to the rather common earthy sort of lads and lasses who are elected to Cardiff Bay? - As my No campaign will be doing!

Oh No!

I have just been informed by the Electoral Commission that my application to lead the No campaign on the grounds that what is offered doesn't go far enough is the only application that they have received on behalf of a No campaign!